Tak 100 dc vs skywatcher 120ed and 150ed

[Flame Nebula]

So, here we have a Tak with an excellent reputation vs two skywatcher ED refractors. Price range £1500-2000. 

I'd be interested in which of these you would recommend, based on comparative viewing. No limits on what was viewed. Given that the 6" ED is similar price to the Tak, I would assume it would be the best choice, as I find it hard to imagine the 4" apo being able to match it? But, perhaps the magical qualities of Taks can do this? 

I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has used the tak and either/both the skywatchers. 

Thanks 

Mark 

[John]

This will be interesting - I have owned a Tak 100 (a DL) for 7 years now and an ED120 for over a decade. I have briefly used a couple of the ED150's (loaned to me) but neither was in good shape optically due to shipping issues (early examples - Skywatcher improved the packaging soon after) so I can't judge those.

I'll give some thought to my views on the 100 - 120 comparison, rather than give a knee jerk reaction so I'll post again in due course.

 

Edited March 9 by John

[John]

Maybe you should tell us a little more about what you are looking for Mark and what your criteria are ?

For example, in terms of portability, an ED150 is not going to be preferrable to a Tak 100 or an ED120 even if it's ultimate performance on a wide range of targets does exceed the smaller aperture scopes.

Do you see what I'm getting at ? 🙂

 

 

[Peter Drew]

I have a Vixen 102mm Fluorite, widely considered as being on a par with a 100mm Takahashi and a SW150ED.  Despite both giving top class refractor quality images, for me the 150 is superior.  The 102mm runs out of light at the magnifications that I need for my ageing eyesight.  If portability or a suitable mount is not an issue then IMO the 150ED would be a better buy.  I paid £1000 for my 6 month old one!    🙂

[Flame Nebula]

17 minutes ago, John said:

Maybe you should tell us a little more about what you are looking for Mark and what your criteria are ?

For example, in terms of portability, an ED150 is not going to be preferrable to a Tak 100 or an ED120 even if it's ultimate performance on a wide range of targets does exceed the smaller aperture scopes.

Do you see what I'm getting at ? 🙂

 

 

Hi John, 

Double star resolution, contrast,. I was tempted when I started the post to throw in a 6" F8 Newtonian, being of similar aperture, but a fraction of the cost, but I doubt it could match the 4" apo for double stars, especially uneven brightness. Also, first impressions - side by side - same object. If you HAD to sell one of them, which would go, probably also tells a useful story. Plus of course, cost. What would convince me to spend £2000 on a 4" tak when for £1500,the ed120 is available, assuming new purchase of course. 

[Flame Nebula]

15 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

I have a Vixen 102mm Fluorite, widely considered as being on a par with a 100mm Takahashi and a SW150ED.  Despite both giving top class refractor quality images, for me the 150 is superior.  The 102mm runs out of light at the magnifications that I need for my ageing eyesight.  If portability or a suitable mount is not an issue then IMO the 150ED would be a better buy.  I paid £1000 for my 6 month old one!    🙂

Thanks Peter. Bargain! I did read a discussion on CN I think, comparing 6" APOs with C11, and interestingly, for visual use, it seemed that many people thought it gave better views, as long as seeing was poor to average. Obviously with good seeing, the opinions changed. 

[Flame Nebula]

Just now, Flame Nebula said:

Thanks Peter. Bargain! I did read a discussion on CN I think, comparing 6" APOs with C11, and interestingly, for visual use, it seemed that many people thought it (6" apo) gave better views, as long as seeing was poor to average. Obviously with good seeing, the opinions changed. 

 

[Stu]

Oh no, he mentioned the T word! 😱😱😬😬

For complete transparency I own an FC-100DC, have owned 3 120EDs but have never owned a 150ED. I have owned a Vixen 150ED f9 which likely have similar views.

To me, this is not all about the views, a lot of it is about useability. Let’s be clear, the 150ED will give significantly better views than the other two (assuming it’s not been damaged in transit!). If I had an observatory with it permanently mounted then I would leap at the chance of owning one. If however you need to setup and break down each time then for me it would get very limited use, as it would need a chunky mount and tripod to keep it stable.

The 120EDs I owned were all nice scopes but for some reason I just didn’t click with them. To me, they don’t have the purity of the view through the Tak, and didn’t have enough of an advantage in terms of the views of planets and the DSOs I could observe from my home near London to make it worthwhile. Others would see it differently and I totally get that.

So, for me in current circumstances I’ll stick with the little 4” beginning with a T. Disregarding image quality, it is one of the lightest 4” scopes around and is airline portable so can be taken anyway you go. It gives excellent Lunar, planetary, double star and white light solar views, and gives a credible effort on DSOs. Mine is my most used scope as it sits on a ScopeTech Zero mount and carbon fibre tripod ready to put out even for the shortest of sessions. It helps that I have a nice 5” version aswell when I want a bit more resolution and light grasp.

In summary, it’s horses for courses. Tak optics obey the same laws of physics that everyone has to play by so a 6” Skywatcher beats a 4” Tak, but it’s about so much more than that as you can see.

[Flame Nebula]

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

Oh no, he mentioned the T word! 😱😱😬😬

For complete transparency I own an FC-100DC, have owned 3 120EDs but have never owned a 150ED. I have owned a Vixen 150ED f9 which likely have similar views.

To me, this is not all about the views, a lot of it is about useability. Let’s be clear, the 150ED will give significantly better views than the other two (assuming it’s not been damaged in transit!). If I had an observatory with it permanently mounted then I would leap at the chance of owning one. If however you need to setup and break down each time the for me it would get very limited use, as it would need a chunky mount and tripod to keep it stable.

The 120EDs I owned were all nice scopes but for some reason I just didn’t click with them. To me, they don’t have the purity of the view through the Tak, and didn’t have enough of an advantage in terms of the views of planets and the DSOs I could observe from my home near London to make it worthwhile. Others would see it differently and I totally get that.

So, for me in current circumstances I’ll stick with the little 4” beginning with a T. Disregarding image quality, it is one of the lightest 4” scopes around and is airline portable so can be taken anyway you go. It gives excellent Lunar, planetary, double star and white light solar views, and gives a credible effort on DSOs. Mine is my most used scope as it sits on a ScopeTech Zero mount and carbon fibre tripod ready to put out even for the shortest of sessions. It helps that I have a nice 5” version aswell when I want a bit more resolution and light grasp.

In summary, it’s horses for courses. Tak optics obey the same laws of physics that everyone has to play by so a 6” Skywatcher beats a 4” Tak, but it’s about so much more than that as you can see.

Thanks Stu, 

Very interesting reply. I can understand the best scope is the one you use most, and a 6" frac is only useful if it's used. 

[Mr Spock]

I've looked at larger scopes a few times. Each time it comes down to the same thing - portability. A larger scope needs a larger mount. My 100mm is perfectly happy on an EQ5. So rather than go to the next size up, I maximised the quality of everything attached to the 100mm. I can use my 120mm on that mount for solar but it isn't ideal.

If I need more aperture, I can get the 12" out. It's all about convenience and maximising the amount of time at the eyepiece and the 100mm is the perfect balance.

[mikeDnight]

 I'm another who hasn't yet had chance to look through an SW150ED, but I'm in no rush to do so.  I have however owned three SW120ED's. The first was a standard black diamond 120ED Pro which really was excellent. I exchanged that for the 120ED Equinox version. This second ED was a touch on the red side which told me they are not all alike as regards quality. It was however a truly great scope never the less. I sold it and bought a 100mm ED but that didnt float my boat, so I bought yet another 120 Equinox ED.  I remember my first view through a SW 120 ED and what I thought about it when viewing the Moon. I told my friend who's scope it was, that "It's  very Tak"! That's the best compliment I could ever give any telescope.

 Years went by and Takahashi returned to producing Fluorite refractors, but with a maximum aperture of 100mm currently. I had owned both the 128 and 152 Tak fluorite and so knew what a dream scope they could be, so I placed an order for the FC100DC. When the FC arrived the first night was clear and I set the FC100DC up alongside my excellent 120 Equinox ED. The 120 gave a very nice view of Jupiter, but when I looked through the Takahashi the equatorial belts appeared much more vibrant, and almost looked like they were braided around the planet. Bare in mind that light grasp made no difference and the resolution gain of the 120ED had no observable impact on the detail on show. In fact the 100mm gave the more detailed view on that first night. Successive nights gave the same results, so I had no regrets when I let the 120ED go. I've used the FC100D exclusively for more than 8 years and wanted for nothing. Last year I had chance to reacqire another FS128 which is a bit of a beast, yet I still love my FC100D. The FC rapidly became my most used telescope, because it was virtually effortless to set up and never failed to offer stunning views.

 You mentioned double stars!  Well, the FC100D is a terrific double star scope. Five hundred X on a steady night is entirely doable with a tracking mount. 1000X if the night is exceptional; I know because I've done it! The FC100 is light weight and can be carried on an EQ5 or Vixen GP with ease. The same mount may very well carry a 120ED providing its on a strong tripod. But a 150ED will need a GPDX or Losmandy GM8 to do it justice.

Attached are a few pics. You can measure how good a scope is by the wideness of my grin! 😆

 

Below is the FC100DC and FC100DZ. 

Honestly! I really don't believe you can go wrong with either the 120ED or the Tak 100. Both are great scopes, but which is best for your personal needs is a choice only you can make. 

[Peter Drew]

On the principle that the best telescope is the one you use most, my situation is that the SWED150 is  piggy backed on a 16" SCT, itself on a massive mount and in an observatory.  To use it just requires opening the dome and switching on the power.  By contrast, the Vixen has to be moved from a cupboard, the mount and tripod have to be carried outside and set up.  The Vixen tends to stay in the cupboard and I don't think I've used it for at least 3 years, a 4" Tak would have a similar life for the same reason.    🙂 

[Flame Nebula]

22 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

 I'm another who hasn't yet had chance to look through an SW150ED, but I'm in no rush to do so.  I have however owned three SW120ED's. The first was a standard black diamond 120ED Pro which really was excellent. I exchanged that for the 120ED Equinox version. This second ED was a touch on the red side which told me they are not all alike as regards quality. It was however a truly great scope never the less. I sold it and bought a 100mm ED but that didnt float my boat, so I bought yet another 120 Equinox ED.  I remember my first view through a SW 120 ED and what I thought about it when viewing the Moon. I told my friend who's scope it was, that "It's  very Tak"! That's the best compliment I could ever give any telescope.

 Years went by and Takahashi returned to producing Fluorite refractors, but with a maximum aperture of 100mm currently. I had owned both the 128 and 152 Tak fluorite and so knew what a dream scope they could be, so I placed an order for the FC100DC. When the FC arrived the first night was clear and I set the FC100DC up alongside my excellent 120 Equinox ED. The 120 gave a very nice view of Jupiter, but when I looked through the Takahashi the equatorial belts appeared much more vibrant, and almost looked like they were braided around the planet. Bare in mind that light grasp made no difference and the resolution gain of the 120ED had no observable impact on the detail on show. In fact the 100mm gave the more detailed view on that first night. Successive nights gave the same results, so I had no regrets when I let the 120ED go. I've used the FC100D exclusively for more than 8 years and wanted for nothing. Last year I had chance to reacqire another FS128 which is a bit of a beast, yet I still love my FC100D. The FC rapidly became my most used telescope, because it was virtually effortless to set up and never failed to offer stunning views.

 You mentioned double stars!  Well, the FC100D is a terrific double star scope. Five hundred X on a steady night is entirely doable with a tracking mount. 1000X if the night is exceptional; I know because I've done it! The FC100 is light weight and can be carried on an EQ5 or Vixen GP with ease. The same mount may very well carry a 120ED providing its on a strong tripod. But a 150ED will need a GPDX or Losmandy GM8 to do it justice.

Attached are a few pics. You can measure how good a scope is by the wideness of my grin! 😆

 

Below is the FC100DC and FC100DZ. 

Honestly! I really don't believe you can go wrong with either the 120ED or the Tak 100. Both are great scopes, but which is best for your personal needs is a choice only you can make. 

Thanks Mike, for this most excellent post! 

You certainly make the Tak a tasty proposition. 😛

If I could afford it with a larger AP scope like a C11(or 10-12" Newt) and an az-eq6 mount, I reckon I'd have all bases covered. I doubt second hand Taks come up often but I saw a C11 for £1000 on astrobuysell recently. The whole lot (new Tak, mount, 2nd hand C11) would be £5K. Now, where is that lottery win? 🤪

I realise my main interest going forward is splitting difficult doubles (including our Sirius friend) and planetary observation (visual and AP), but since I already have an ed89 and dslr, the az-eq6 mount can be used for that too to cover dso! Sorry for digressing. Thanks 

Mark 

 

 

[Flame Nebula]

18 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

On the principle that the best telescope is the one you use most, my situation is that the SWED150 is  piggy backed on a 16" SCT, itself on a massive mount and in an observatory.  To use it just requires opening the dome and switching on the power.  By contrast, the Vixen has to be moved from a cupboard, the mount and tripod have to be carried outside and set up.  The Vixen tends to stay in the cupboard and I don't think I've used it for at least 3 years, a 4" Tak would have a similar life for the same reason.    🙂 

A 16" sct with 150mm frac on top. 

Where's the drooling emoji when you need it!? 

[Flame Nebula]

20 minutes ago, Flame Nebula said:

Thanks Mike, for this most excellent post! 

You certainly make the Tak a tasty proposition. 😛

If I could afford it with a larger AP scope like a C11(or 10-12" Newt) and an az-eq6 mount, I reckon I'd have all bases covered. I doubt second hand Taks come up often but I saw a C11 for £1000 on astrobuysell recently. The whole lot (new Tak, mount, 2nd hand C11) would be £5K. Now, where is that lottery win? 🤪

I realise my main interest going forward is splitting difficult doubles (including our Sirius friend) and planetary observation (visual and AP), but since I already have an ed89 and dslr, the az-eq6 mount can be used for that too to cover dso! Sorry for digressing. Thanks 

Mark 

 

 

I forgot to add. 1000x! 250x per inch!! Did that give you more than 125x per inch? The Tak can do that? And still sharp? My ed80 starts breaking down around 40-50x per inch. 

 

 

[Nakedgun]

~

Since you already realize the process involved with setting up and using each of the apertures you're inquiring about, let's not belabor the point about "the most used scope" and "make sure not to undermount" etc. and assume you will use what you have.

The SW150ED is what you want. I've owned one, as well as a SW120ED, and Tak 100s (DC &  DZ & 102). The 150 offered a perfect star test and although quite long, was relatively lightweight, to boot. Aperture wins at this level of quality.

Stop messing around and buy one, already!

Good luck!

 

 

 

.

[mikeDnight]

14 hours ago, Flame Nebula said:

I forgot to add. 1000x! 250x per inch!! Did that give you more than 125x per inch? The Tak can do that? And still sharp? My ed80 starts breaking down around 40-50x per inch. 

 

 

The Tak can definitely do that on a steady night. My FC100DZ gives 500X with a 1.6mm Vixen High Resolution eyepiece, and with a barlow gave an unbelievable sharp and contrasty view of contrasting doubles at 1000X.  But you mentioned splitting close doubles! For that you may need a little more aperture and where Tak are concerned that means £££££. A TOA 130 or TOA 150 would make double stars, as well as your bank balance tremble!!

Edited March 10 by mikeDnight

[Moonlit Night]

On this occasion I would side with the ED120. The extra light grab would be most useful indeed and truth be told you kinda need to use your imagination to see a difference in optical quality beyond a noticeable jump in resolution. 

[Moonlit Night]

Some of the claims about various brands of telescopes from various companies and parts of the world and supposed magnification need taking with a pinch of salt btw. Consider your seeing conditions and the laws of physics. It will stand you in good stead. 

[johnturley]

23 hours ago, Flame Nebula said:

So, here we have a Tak with an excellent reputation vs two skywatcher ED refractors. Price range £1500-2000. 

I'd be interested in which of these you would recommend, based on comparative viewing. No limits on what was viewed. Given that the 6" ED is similar price to the Tak, I would assume it would be the best choice, as I find it hard to imagine the 4" apo being able to match it? But, perhaps the magical qualities of Taks can do this? 

I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has used the tak and either/both the skywatchers. 

Thanks 

Mark 

A couple of months ago, I compared the views of Jupiter and the Moon through my Tak 100DZ, with that through my then ES 127 FCD 100, and Esprit 150 Refractors. The view through the Tak did not even come close to that through the Esprit 150, which was streets ahead of that through both the 100DZ and ES 127. I would expect the Esprit 150 to have the edge over the Skywatcher 150 ED, but they may well be close, and I think someone on Cloudy Nights did a comparison between a Skywatcher ED 150, and a TEC 140, and the ED 150 compared quite favourably. One point to bear in mind though, is that according to Es Reid, the quality control tends to be better with the larger Esprits (he vary rarely has to adjust or send one back), which also I think have a more robust lens cell than the Skywatcher ED Refractors.

Regarding the comparison between the ED 127 and the Tak 100DZ, I thought that they were very close, but maybe the 100 DZ had the edge over the ES 127, when it came the sharpness of the view. Bear in mind though, I purchased the 100 DZ, mainly because I wanted something lighter and more portable than the ES 127, rather than because I expected it to give superior views.

Some Tak owners also state that they can comfortably use 100x or even 125x per inch of aperture with their Tak scopes, this may well be the case when it comes to double stars, but on Jupiter, and admittedly not under the best of viewing conditions, I felt that the 100 DZ ran out of steam if I tried to go above 200x (50x per inch of aperture), and found the image rather dim and nor very sharp. 

John 

Edited March 10 by johnturley

[Moonlit Night]

43 minutes ago, johnturley said:

A couple of months ago, I compared the views of Jupiter and the Moon through my Tak 100DZ, with that through my then ES 127 FCD 100, and Esprit 150 Refractors. The view through the Tak did not even come close to that through the Esprit 150, which was streets ahead of that through both the 100DZ and ES 127. I would expect the Esprit 150 to have the edge over the Skywatcher 150 ED, but they may well be close, and I think someone on Cloudy Nights did a comparison between a Skywatcher ED 150, and a TEC 140, and the ED 150 compared quite favourably. One point to bear in mind though, is that according to Es Reid, the quality control tends to be better with the larger Esprits, which also I think, have a more robust lens cell than the Skywatcher ED Refractors.

Regarding the comparison between the ED 127 and the Tak 100DZ, I thought that they were very close, but maybe the 100 DZ had the edge over the ES 127, when it came the sharpness of the view. Bear in mind though, I purchased the 100 DZ, mainly because I wanted something lighter and more portable than the ES 127, rather than because I expected it to give superior views.

Some Tak owners also state that they can comfortably use 100x or even 125x per inch of aperture with their Tak scopes, this may well be the case when it comes to double stars, but on Jupiter, and admittedly not under the best of viewing conditions, I felt that the 100 DZ ran out of steam if I tried to go above 200x (50x per inch of aperture), and found the image rather dim and nor very sharp. 

John 

As one might expect.

Anyway, boring scope wars aside, and to return to topic, have you made a decision yet. 

Edited March 10 by Moonlit Night

[Stu]

1 hour ago, Moonlit Night said:

On this occasion I would side with the ED120. The extra light grab would be most useful indeed and truth be told you kinda need to use your imagination to see a difference in optical quality beyond a noticeable jump in resolution. 

 

1 hour ago, Moonlit Night said:

Some of the claims about various brands of telescopes from various companies and parts of the world and supposed magnification need taking with a pinch of salt btw. Consider your seeing conditions and the laws of physics. It will stand you in good stead. 

I would respectfully disagree with your first quote above and agree with the second.

No imagination needed to see the benefits of the optics to my eye. Not saying the 120ED is bad, it’s not, it’s just I enjoy looking through the 100 more and didn’t see a huge difference between the two in terms of what I could see. I prefer the 100 on planets.

In terms of mag, the shortest eyepieces I have at the Vixen 2.4 HR Planetary and a 2 to 4mm Nagler Zoom. These give x308 and x370 respectively. I rarely use them and when I do it is on double stars and the seeing has to be excellent to make it worthwhile. I can’t see it performing well much higher than that. I’ve used x300 on Mars with my Vixen FL102S and it gave good results, although was comprehensively out performed by my 8” f8 dob on the same night.

[Moonlit Night]

Anyway…

Whatever you decide you are going to have an excellent scope. As long as you can mount it on a stable mount you are going to have a lot of fun.

[Moonlit Night]

The ED150 had lots of mixed reviews when it was released first. I was very tempted until then. Didn’t John have one on loan from FLO for a bit?

[IB20]

I haven’t always been so, but I’m starting to creep into the “aperture wins” field especially when it comes to refractors.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/offers/offer_stellamira-125mm-ed-doublet-f78-refractor-telescope_420375.html recently saw this on offer, nice and light for a 5”…

Edited March 10 by IB20